🚀 go-pugleaf

Greg Menke wrote:

> I've not heard of a case where there is any significant difference
> between position independent and non-position independent.

That's reassuring.

> I suspect
> most code ends up compiled independent in any case.  Perhaps it could
> change something in how registers are allocated, but that would be
> something highly architecture specific.
>
> static vs shared is used to create either a dynamically or statically
> linked library.  A static library ends up being an archive of .o files
> that are included in a executable when its linked, whereas a
> dynamically linked library can be attached to an executable at
> runtime.  Optimization is not affected because shared/static is more
> of a linker issue than a compiler issue.  Once the code is in memory
> and the fixups applied to all the symbols, there isn't any difference.

Great.

> When you compile an executable, you're not creating a library, so
> shared/static are not applicable.
>
> >
> > The -shared is obvious, and the -Wl is for the linker.
> > I never used the linker explicitly before, relying on gcc to
> > pull it all together.  Now, I'm looking at "man ld", which
> > is the sunOS5.8 man page, and I'm not sure if it is the same
> > one that gcc uses.  Is there any reason to think otherwise?
>
> A map file is simply a textual representation of some of addresses &
> symbols in the output executable.  Perhaps Matlab is reading the map
> file to get symbol information or some such.  If you're curious about
> looking at compiled code, use objdump -dt against your .o file.
>
> Here, ld is not being invoked separately, the -Wl tells gcc to pass
> along the following parameter when it invokes ld.  You definately
> don't want to be playing around with ld until you know you need to.
>
> Gregm

Well, thanks for the confirmation that I shouldn't be poking around
with ld unnecessarily.  I wasn't looking forward to spending loads
of timing ramping up on a new tool.

Fred